The Law of Arbitration Rules that are Final and Binding

IF 0.1 Q4 LAW Indonesia Law Review Pub Date : 2020-12-31 DOI:10.15742/ilrev.v10n3.655
Heru Sugiyono, Heru Suyanto, R. Agustanti
{"title":"The Law of Arbitration Rules that are Final and Binding","authors":"Heru Sugiyono, Heru Suyanto, R. Agustanti","doi":"10.15742/ilrev.v10n3.655","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A request in a district court for annulment of an arbitration, or arbitral, award is a form of legal remedy that claims dissatisfaction with the award by one or more parties. It contravenes the provisions that stipulate the finality of the award and its permanently binding legal force. The attempt to invalidate the arbitral award seems to reflect the party’s (or parties’) disobedience to it. The research method here employed normative juridical review of various library materials consisting of primary legal sources from related laws and regulations, secondary materials which formed the explanations used in the analysis of the primary legal materials in the form of doctrine, academic views, judicial decisions, document searches, books, and scientific works. The legal material is identified and analyzed to achieve the objectives of the study. The results indicate that there is legal uncertainty related to the provision, specifically whether a district court can overturn a final arbitration award and that it carries the legal force to bind the parties. Therefore, it is necessary to create that certainty, and write off Law No. 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution, article 70. Arbitrators are encouraged to act more professionally in examining and delivering fair arbitration awards without being tainted by false evidence or gimmicks.","PeriodicalId":13484,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indonesia Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15742/ilrev.v10n3.655","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A request in a district court for annulment of an arbitration, or arbitral, award is a form of legal remedy that claims dissatisfaction with the award by one or more parties. It contravenes the provisions that stipulate the finality of the award and its permanently binding legal force. The attempt to invalidate the arbitral award seems to reflect the party’s (or parties’) disobedience to it. The research method here employed normative juridical review of various library materials consisting of primary legal sources from related laws and regulations, secondary materials which formed the explanations used in the analysis of the primary legal materials in the form of doctrine, academic views, judicial decisions, document searches, books, and scientific works. The legal material is identified and analyzed to achieve the objectives of the study. The results indicate that there is legal uncertainty related to the provision, specifically whether a district court can overturn a final arbitration award and that it carries the legal force to bind the parties. Therefore, it is necessary to create that certainty, and write off Law No. 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution, article 70. Arbitrators are encouraged to act more professionally in examining and delivering fair arbitration awards without being tainted by false evidence or gimmicks.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
具有终局性和约束力的仲裁法规则
向地方法院提出撤销仲裁或仲裁裁决的请求是一种法律救济形式,要求一方或多方对裁决表示不满。它违反了关于裁决终局性及其永久法律约束力的规定。试图使仲裁裁决无效似乎反映了当事人(或当事人)对仲裁裁决的不服从。本文的研究方法是对各种图书馆资料进行规范性的司法审查,这些资料包括来自相关法律法规的一手法律来源,以及以学说、学术观点、司法判决、文献检索、书籍和科学著作等形式构成一手法律资料分析中所使用的解释的二手资料。识别和分析法律材料,以实现研究的目标。结果表明,该条款存在法律上的不确定性,特别是地方法院是否可以推翻最终仲裁裁决,以及该条款是否具有约束当事人的法律效力。因此,有必要创造这种确定性,并注销1999年关于仲裁和替代性争议解决的第30号法第70条。鼓励仲裁员更加专业地审查和作出公正的仲裁裁决,不受虚假证据和噱头的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Limiting the Legality of Determining Suspects in Indonesia Pre-Trial System Understanding the Role of Consent in Data Protection Regime: How Indonesia Can Learn From the GDPR Simple, Speedy, and Low Cost Trial : A Panacea For Corruption in Indonesia? THE ADMISSIBILITY OF EARTH OBSERVATION DATA IN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS: A CLOSER LOOK TOWARDS DATA IMAGING CRIMINISTRATIVE LAW: DEVELOPMENTS AND CHALLENGES IN INDONESIA
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1